Planned Global Skins

[Parameter]

I think I'm missing the benefit here. I don't know about starmade, but minecraft skins are a few kB. Let's be generous and throw out 30kB per skin. A 28k modem can transfer than in a couple seconds. Why do we need to cache these skins across the server landscape? The bandwidth needed to transfer 3 skins is less than the bandwidth needed to load this web page once. I could wait an extra 10 seconds the first time I join a new server for my client to load my skins to the server and cache them right there, on the server, where I play. That way, the bandwidth is covered by me and the server host, no need for Schine to upkeep.

If you really want to store them and serve them on your CDN for me, but need to keep bandwidth costs low, check if you need to send the data. Most people will probably only play on a handful of servers. Convert uploaded images to a consistent format, tar the skins + compress if your format warrants it, and md5 the tar blob. Store the md5, and check it against a server checksum when a player connects. Only send the skin data if the checksums don't match. Voila, you only use bandwidth on skins when a visited server clears its skin cache, a player visits a new server, or a player changes their uploaded skins. I bet that's not a lot of times.

If you want to provide some space in the registry for me to backup my skins along with my player data, that is awesome. But $150 buys you a reasonable 2TB hard drive. That's ~66.7 million skins. Consumer cloud storage is more, but still very affordable. Commercial cloud storage/bandwidth services like a CDN are a long term fixed cost, but you're probably paying it anyways with the web site and registry. Additional bandwidth used for skins is ridiculously cheap. Let's be generous and say you're paying the high sum of $0.20 per GB bandwidth. That's $0.000006 per 30kB skin transferred uncompressed. You could transfer 10 skins 100,000 times and still pay less than a dime.

If you're wanting to use microtransactions to monetize StarMade, that's your decision. I respect that from a business perspective you need to monetize your IP somehow, and if people are willing to pay for you to shovel some bytes along the intertubes that's good for your business. However, I'm failing to see the technical argument for paying for skin storage or data transfers besides another couple of dimes you could add on to the purchase price of the game.

I would, however, be VERY interested in spending some dollars on high-quality skin packs released by you guys as an addition to some default skin variety present in the base game. Players like to dress up their characters - providing that dress-up content at a price might be a better money-maker than charging people to serve up content they already own. You could look at Valve's Team Fortress 2 and its hats for some pros and cons to that business model.

 

[Employee763]

I feel as though it is something Schine could try for a little bit, then take out if it becomes too much trouble.

 

[Blaza612]

Again, as CyberTao and I have said, this would ultimately be detrimental to the game, and could possibly fuck the game entirely, with the backlash overpowering the community, leading to the eventual death of the game. That's worst case scenario, but we all saw what happened to Evolve. They were selling day one DLC/Micro-transactions, which were cosmetics, and they got completely obliterated by everyone. As I've previously stated, I'm personally fine with cosmetic micro-transactions, but I will NOT support something that can possibly kill the game's community, and thus the game.

 

[killerdude8]

As Parameter pointed out, There really isn't a need for this, It would be different if you were storing something big, but something as small and insignificant as skins, You could steal someones internet and manage that, You'd never get caught.
I'd avoid microtransactions and all the negative publicity that comes along with them.

There's literally no reason to change the current system, Changing for the sake of change is almost never a good idea.

 

[testkil]

Just give people one skin slot ... no need to make schine pay more just because some people are too lazy to store a few skins in a folder and change them when they wand (a bit like minecraft)

chosing a skin and then clicking upload is not more work than clicking on another skin and then pressing ok


just don't be so generous on a 10 dollar game most of the other EA games are way more expensive and give less to their players

 

[Parameter]

Just give people one skin slot ... no need to make schine pay more just because some people are too lazy to store a few skins in a folder and change them when they wand (a bit like minecraft)

chosing a skin and then clicking upload is not more work than clicking on another skin and then pressing ok


just don't be so generous on a 10 dollar game most of the other EA games are way more expensive and give less to their players

I generally agree with that. However, also consider the less-than-stellar reputation EA has among large swaths of gamers...

 

[Yrjosmiel]

I think that 3 slots are enough. Heck, even 2 is alright.

Who the hell needs that many skins? Just change the slot, damn it.

 

[killerdude8]

The real question we should be asking, Who the hell needs that many skins, they'd be willing to pay money for more.

 

[wedtm]

Thanks for the input, everyone. I think a lot of you have very similar ideals regarding this as we do. We don't want to be saturating the game with micro-transactions, but we do want to be able to offer new features while still maintaining a healthy company.

Our main goal for the extra skin slots is convenience. Yes, some people see this as laziness and think that everyone should be just fine with 1 (or 2 or 3) skins. We fully expect this feature to see very little use. However, just because there are those who wouldn't use the feature, doesn't mean that those who would should be ignored. It all comes down to the simple mantra of "If you don't want it, don't buy it.".

Again, I appreciate everyone's input. We'll be making a decision on this soon and I will post an update in regards to it when we have more info.

 

[Blaza612]

Thanks for the input, everyone. I think a lot of you have very similar ideals regarding this as we do. We don't want to be saturating the game with micro-transactions, but we do want to be able to offer new features while still maintaining a healthy company.

Our main goal for the extra skin slots is convenience. Yes, some people see this as laziness and think that everyone should be just fine with 1 (or 2 or 3) skins. We fully expect this feature to see very little use. However, just because there are those who wouldn't use the feature, doesn't mean that those who would should be ignored. It all comes down to the simple mantra of "If you don't want it, don't buy it.".

Again, I appreciate everyone's input. We'll be making a decision on this soon and I will post an update in regards to it when we have more info.

While the "If you don't want it, don't buy it." is a valid reason in my eyes, any new comers that see this will most likely lash out. Again, I'm worried that the micro-transactions hate train will damage the games community (and the game's sales) severely, and I don't want to see that happen. Ever.

 

[Parameter]

Thanks for the input, everyone. I think a lot of you have very similar ideals regarding this as we do. We don't want to be saturating the game with micro-transactions, but we do want to be able to offer new features while still maintaining a healthy company.

Our main goal for the extra skin slots is convenience. Yes, some people see this as laziness and think that everyone should be just fine with 1 (or 2 or 3) skins. We fully expect this feature to see very little use. However, just because there are those who wouldn't use the feature, doesn't mean that those who would should be ignored. It all comes down to the simple mantra of "If you don't want it, don't buy it.".

Again, I appreciate everyone's input. We'll be making a decision on this soon and I will post an update in regards to it when we have more info.

Just wanted to take a second and say I admire how open Schine is with its community on its planning for this game. It is refreshing to see a company where all levels from developers to HR to business planning all interact in a positive manner with their user community. Thank you for taking the time to involve us in your decision-making. I look forward to seeing what you guys come up with!

 

[Reilly Reese]

While the "If you don't want it, don't buy it." is a valid reason in my eyes, any new comers that see this will most likely lash out. Again, I'm worried that the micro-transactions hate train will damage the games community (and the game's sales) severely, and I don't want to see that happen. Ever.

The current community has said they don't really think it's a problem if a bunch of haters come we can staighten them out and reference them to this page.

 

[Blaza612]

The current community has said they don't really think it's a problem if a bunch of haters come we can staighten them out and reference them to this page.

Individual haters, yes. But when there's practically a riot invading a community, then one cannot handle it. If someone is hating on Starmade for micro-transactions, they're not doing it because they think the game shit, they're doing it because they're aware of the fact that micro-transactions are destroying the games industry and that they're sick of them. They're doing what they KNOW (yes, know, because micro-transactions are a problem) that this is bad, because they want to defend the games industry as a whole, telling them that hating is not allowed and banning them isn't going to stop them, if anything it'll provide with ANOTHER argument against us in an effort to call Schine shady. It only gets worst from here.

With that in mind, this is still just a worst case scenario, but still quite likely to happen once the game gets more popular.

 

[Reilly Reese]

Individual haters, yes. But when there's practically a riot invading a community, then one cannot handle it. If someone is hating on Starmade for micro-transactions, they're not doing it because they think the game shit, they're doing it because they're aware of the fact that micro-transactions are destroying the games industry and that they're sick of them. They're doing what they KNOW (yes, know, because micro-transactions are a problem) that this is bad, because they want to defend the games industry as a whole, telling them that hating is not allowed and banning them isn't going to stop them, if anything it'll provide with ANOTHER argument against us in an effort to call Schine shady. It only gets worst from here.

With that in mind, this is still just a worst case scenario, but still quite likely to happen once the game gets more popular.

Who said banning? Just point out "Hey the community that went through the very public beta period helped make this choice and there's nothing wrong with it bugger off."

 

[Blaza612]

Who said banning? Just point out "Hey the community that went through the very public beta period helped make this choice and there's nothing wrong with it bugger off."

I'm saying as that's a countermeasure for flaming, iirc. :P

 

[Lecic]

Am I the only one here who doesn't hate the concept of paying for vanity items/skins/etc? I think it's a great way for developers to earn some extra money and for people to support devs without making people miss out on content.

I think 2 or 3 free skin slots, and then $1 for purchasing additional skin slots, would be fair.

EDIT- Read through more posts.

A hate train isn't going to come to this game because you could pay for bonus skins. Evolve is literally the only game I have ever seen have people freak the fuck out about vanity purchases.

 

[Winterhome]

Non-game-related cosmetic thing that you can buy to make it *easier* to switch skins, as opposed to restricting your skin switching?
No complaints here, but I really don't see the point.

If someone wants to buy that utility, though, more power to them.

Just make sure that these purchasable things stay out of the actual game, and in the launcher and stuff, aye? And don't put it behind a gigantic pay wall like so many other games with ingame purchases do. None of these giant fucking banners saying "ONLY 1000 SCHINE POINTS TO UNLOCK THIS TOOL!" or whatever.

 

[Blaza612]

Am I the only one here who doesn't hate the concept of paying for vanity items/skins/etc? I think it's a great way for developers to earn some extra money and for people to support devs without making people miss out on content.

I think 2 or 3 free skin slots, and then $1 for purchasing additional skin slots, would be fair.

EDIT- Read through more posts.

A hate train isn't going to come to this game because you could pay for bonus skins. Evolve is literally the only game I have ever seen have people freak the fuck out about vanity purchases.

There will be hate, whether it's about the skins or not. Personally, I'm fine with skins, but I've just presented everyone with a worst case scenario to think about. As you probably already know, I say no to this simply to prevent community backlash.

 

[Lecic]

As you probably already know, I say no to this simply to prevent community backlash.

There's not going to be community backlash. People hated it in Evolve because
1) Mob mentality. One asshole flips out about it, everyone flips out about it because, let's be real here, gamers are morons.
2) It was by an AAA company, and people hate DLCs from AAA companies. I'm sure people would also flip out about it if Starmade seemed like one of those indie games trying to make a quick buck, but I think Schine's proved themselves to not be one of those companies for quite some time.

It'll be a completely optional and 100% unneeded feature for a little convenience, so you don't need to re-upload a skin every time. Very few people will need more than 1, let alone 3.

 

[Valck]

The only caveat I see with introducing stuff like this is you'd need additional connections to authentication servers that decide whether or not you are allowed to switch skins, or possibly in a future evolution of this concept, spawn blueprint X, or use block Z.

• What happens when that auth server is down, unreachable, or (heavens forbid) permanently taken off the net because [insert big bucks here] bought Schine and decided it's not worth it any longer or you can only sign up if you have their iBoxStationU account?
• Who controls the auth server?
• Who controls the user data?

At the moment, should the SMRegistry become unreachable for whatever reason, single player and game servers would be able to continue, albeit without user verification. White-/Blacklists by name and IP would still continue to work.
It all depends on how deeply this is integrated with the registry, and whether the game would still continue to function without third-party infrastructure (third party here meaning not game server operator nor game client user).

As long as Schine are the ones in control, I don't care much either way; however there is always the possibility of someone pulling a Notch - dissing EA, and M$ for Windows8, and then selling out to that very scourge of indy development... not that I think Schema would, but nobody thought Persson would, either.